9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 1167X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessing Authority by treating the explanation and confirmations given by the Assessee as sufficient and never was the NRI Donor produced and found to be genuine by the Assessing Authority. The CIT (Appeals) has discussed all these aspects after the specific enhancement notice was given by him and thereafter giving the cogent findings of the facts. Thus on the admission of the Assessee himself that such money was his own undisclosed income brought back in the country through alleged NRI gifts was the best evidence and in our opinion was sufficient to bring it to tax in the hands of the Assessee Firm, and the learned CIT (Appeals) cannot be said to have faulted in any manner in serving an enhancement notice, inter alia, on the said issue and making the additions in the hands of the Assessee Firm. In our opinion, the Tribunal was justified in rejecting the Miscellaneous Petition of the Assessee also under Section 254 of the Act as there was no mistake apparent in the original appeal order passed by the Tribunal - decided against the Assessee - Tax Case Appeal No. 1907 of 2008 - - - Dated:- 8-3-2019 - Dr. Justice Vineet Kothari And Mr. Justice C.V. Karthikeyan For the Appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of my son, my wife Saraswathi and my daughter Shoba styling them as NRI Gifts. I am not able to prove these amounts mentioned by you in this question as NRI gifts. As these amounts are out of my own income chargeable to tax, nor disclosed to the department, I am offering the total sum of ₹ 14,65,500/- as my undisclosed income for tax. 4. The learned CIT (Appeals) made the said additions in the hands of the Assessee with the following findings recorded in his order dated 31.12.2002:- NRI gift remittances received by the Appellant: ₹ 14,65,000/- 10.15 Regarding NRI gift remittances amounting to ₹ 14,65,000/-, the appellant reiterated the submissions made before the Assessing Officer vide its letter dated 23.10.2001 wherein it was explained with details of the donors and amounts gifted by them. It was further pointed out that since the gifts were confirmed by the accepted these NRI gift remittances as genuine transactions. It was contended, purposes under Section 251(1) of the Income-Tax Act, 1961. 10.16 I have carefully considered the submissions made by the appellant and in my opinion, they do not carry sufficient force. At the outset, it sh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the said addition made by CIT (Appeals) was upheld by the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, with the following findings:- 11. With regard to NRI gifts amounting to ₹ 14,65,000/- assessee vide its letter dated 23.10.2001 reiterated the submissions made before the Assessing Officer and it was explained that since the gifts were confirmed by the donors along with their bank accounts, passport etc., the Assessing Officer should have accepted these NRI gifts as genuine. Therefore, it was contended that there was no scope for taking up this issue once again for enhancement under sef.251(1) of he Act. For this, the C.I.T.(Appeals) referred the Question No.2 and its answer as found in pages 22 7 23 are as follows:- (already quoted above) The C.I.T. (Appeals) found that these NRI gift transactions aggregating to ₹ 14,65,500/- were in no way connected with the sales turnover of ₹ 4,00,78,555/- in lieu of which the assessee declared the undisclosed income to the turn of ₹ 79,68,000/-. According to the C.I.T. (Appeals), the gift transactions from the NRIs are nothing but a colourable device. He, following the decision in the case of Smt.Shanthi Devi Jain ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the Assessee was also accepted by the Assessing Authority. 8. It was also urged that the learned CIT (Appeals) could not give an enhancement notice to the Assessee and make the aforesaid additions after the search at the business place of the Assessee had taken place and the same could not have formed part of the block period at all. He has further submitted that the learned Tribunal has erred in not correcting the said mistake upon the Miscellaneous Petition filed by the Assessee under Section 254 of the Act. 9. The learned counsel for the respondent/Revenue however submitted that the enhancement notice was given by the learned CIT (Appeals) on various issues as would be clear from his notice dated 29.10.2002 which, inter alia, included at Sl. No. 4 the alleged NRI gifts of own money to the extent of ₹ 14,65,500/- and even though the Assessee filed his reply to the said enhancement notice and contested the said issue, he has never raised the said defence that the alleged gifts NRI have been accepted by the Assessing Authority in the returns filed by the Assessment Year 1994-1995. 10 . The learned counsel for the Assessee has also relied upon the decision of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
